Monday, November 30, 2015

Maurice Strong, the 'NWO father' of global warming and Agenda 21 is dead

Maurice Strong, whose work helped lead to the landmark climate summit that begins in Paris on Monday, has died at 86, the head of the UN’s environmental agency said Saturday.

The life and role of Maurice Strong is key to understanding how the myth of anthropogenic global warming was created and how it was used to establish the context for Agenda 21, arguably the most significant and most secretive plan for global transformation we have witnessed; more significant than the two world wars of the last century. As such, I feel it is important to understand how this has been unfolded in our world.

Arguably, the notion of scarcity as an issue for humanity as a result of human behaviour was given perhaps its first serious outing via the Club of Rome, with its 1972 report “The Limits to Growth”. This report contained projections that, if they had been accurate, would have seen us running out of most of the world’s resources by the end of the last century, if my memory serves me correctly. I remember reading it not long after it came out, in my student days, and being very concerned about the impact of these projections. It turned out to be a very healthy piece of fear-mongering by the global elite, perhaps their first step down this path.

Today as I look back, I now understand that our world had no need for an oil-based economy, except it served the interests of that same elite to promote and sustain it, and then use its likely scarcity as a powerfully ramped tax on the global population. Nikola Tesla demonstrated how to harvest the background energy field back in the early 20th century, but was stopped in his tracks by JP Morgan, a powerful banking agent of the Rothschilds.

But I digress.In my view, it is important to understand the way the controlling NWO global elite operate in the background and who the key players and organisations are if we are to see the threads of the Maurice Strong story. This video provides a useful, if inevitably favourable perspective on the emergence of Maurice Strong. I quote from that video’s notes:

From the CBC documentary ‘Life and Times’ (2004).

This clip takes a look at one of the world’s leading figures behind the New World Order agenda, and someone near the very top of the global warming/global tax/one world government swindle. For the past several years, Strong has been living in China following his exposed involvement in the UN’s Oil for Food scandal.

While the documentary casts an unabashedly favorable and glowing light on Strong, making him out to be a humanitarian of sorts and someone wanting to make the world a better place through his connections in business and government, those who have done the research and have studied Mr. Strong’s background and associations understand that this simply isn’t the case. However, this clip does at least highlight the dizzying speed in which Strong rose to power, as well as his many elite associations.

Despite having little education and almost no credentials, Strong was quickly risen through the ranks of power after being vetted by globalist kingpin David Rockefeller in the mid-40s, at the United Nations headquarters in New York City, after Strong landed a job there with the help of people who had connections to the UN.

Strong played a vital role in the rise to power of former Canadian Prime Minister, Paul Martin, landing him his first real job at Canada’s Power Corporation. The same goes for James Wolfensohn, former president of the World Bank, who also later hired Strong as an adviser.

End of quote.

This video explains how Strong was born in 1929 into a poor Canadian family. His desire to succeed was very evident and, at the age of 17, was working for David Rockefeller at the UN, which was when the UN was just getting started. It is clear that Rockefeller took Strong under his wing and defined his life path. It is only when you consider this can you explain Strong’s meteoric success in his 20’s in the Canadian oil industry, leading to financial independence and to heading up Canada’s Power Corporation, which this video demonstrates has been used as a training ground for Canada’s power elite. Interestingly, this Wikipedia profile of Strong fails to mention that early UN connection. No surprises there. In fact it says the following: Strong first met with a leading UN official in 1947 who arranged for him to have a temporary low-level appointment…

Well, we know better…

But the real game for Strong – changing life as we know it on behalf of the global elite he serves – began in 1971. I quote from Wikipedia:

In 1971, Strong commissioned a report on the state of the planet, Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet [12] and co-authored by Barbara Ward and Rene Dubos. The report summarized the findings of 152 leading experts from 58 countries in preparation for the first UN meeting on the environment, held in Stockholm in 1972. This was the world’s first “state of the environment” report.

The Stockholm Conference established the environment as part of an international development agenda. It led to the establishment by the UN General Assembly in December 1972 of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), with headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya, and the election of Strong to head it. UNEP was the first UN agency to be headquartered in the third world.[13] As head of UNEP, Strong convened the first international expert group meeting on climate change.[14]

Maurice Strong was one of the commissioners of the World Commission on Environment and Development, set up as an independent body by the United Nations in 1983.

End of quote.

Here is a brief 1972 interview with Strong by the BBC leading up to the 1972 conference.

The 1972 Stockholm conference was the first of what, so far, has been 3 conferences, 20 years apart, driving this agenda of global change; 1972 in Stockholm, 1992 in Rio and 2012, again in Rio. Coincidence or a pointer to a carefully crafted plan? The 1972 conference was also the basis for setting up the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This video is part one of two made at the time to discuss the context for an unfolding of the 1972 Stockholm Conference. It is worth listening to the carefully crafted speeches and the words of Maurice Strong.

Wikipedia gives us a useful introduction to the IPCC:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a scientific intergovernmental body under the auspices of the United Nations,[1][2] set up at the request of member governments.[3] It was first established in 1988 by two United Nations organizations, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and later endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly through Resolution 43/53. Membership of the IPCC is open to all members of the WMO and UNEP.[4] The IPCC produces reports that support the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which is the main international treaty on climate change.[5][6] The ultimate objective of the UNFCCC is to “stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic [i.e., human-induced] interference with the climate system”.[5] IPCC reports cover “the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.”[6]

And this:

The aims of the IPCC are to assess scientific information relevant to:[6]

Human-induced climate change,

The impacts of human-induced climate change,

Options for adaptation and mitigation.

End of quote.

Notice their brief is just to look at anthropogenic causes, implicitly ignoring such things as the sun!!! Was that a guffaw I heard? It’s a classic set-up, with the terms of reference defining the outcome. It is the assertion of this page entitled IPCC History Lesson and others that “Maurice Strong wrote the terms of reference for the IPCC Climate Assessments to cover only man-made causes of climate change”.

The next significant stop on our journey is the 1992 UNCED (appropriately pronounced unsaid…) Earth Summit in Rio, at which Agenda 21 came into being. George W. Hunt was exposed to the plans and actions of Strong, Edmond Rothschild and David Rockefeller leading up to the 1992 conference. He shares his extraordinary insights here. At that time, he did not know that Agenda 21 would come forth from that conference. Hunt’s interactions and insights leave little doubt as to the agenda, focus and allegiance of Maurice Strong.

This article by Julian Websdale spells out the context for and the content of Agenda 21, rolled out at the 1992 UNCED conference, including the role of Maurice Strong:

Agenda 21 was established at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992, hosted by Maurice Strong, a Canadian oil and business billionaire and long-time front man for the Rothschilds and Rockefellers. Strong has been a leader of their exploit-the-environment-to-scam-the-people programme which is now in full flow. Strong is a member of the Club of Rome, the environmental Hidden Hand in the Round Table network that includes the Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission and Council on Foreign Relations……

Agenda 21 is called ‘the agenda for the 21st century’ and that refers to global fascism / communism. This is a summary of what Agenda 21 / Sustainable Development / Biodiversity is seeking to impose:

• The State to ‘define the role’ of business and financial resources• Abolition of private property (it’s not ‘sustainable’)

• ‘Restructuring’ the family unit• Children raised by the State• People told what their job will be• Major restrictions on movement• Creation of ‘human settlement zones’

• Mass resettlement as people are forced to vacate land where they currently live• Dumbing down education (achieved)

• Mass global depopulation in pursuit of all the above

This horrific plan is being coordinated through the United Nations, the stalking horse for world dictatorship, via a non-governmental network once called the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives ICLEI), and now known as Local Governments for Sustainability although still using the shortened name ICLEI. The United Nations is now opening ‘embassies’ around the world called ‘UN Houses’ under the guise of raising awareness of UN activities, but not the activities that people really need to know about. They have opened one in Hunter Square, Edinburgh, Scotland, for example.

Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI) and other organisations are integrating the plan into every village, town, city and region and it is already becoming widespread across the world. The organisational infrastructure of Agenda 21 is already fantastic and involves government agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), think-tanks, trusts, foundations, ‘training’ (mind control) operations and ‘initiatives’ which have been building the infrastructure for what they call ‘the post-industrial, post-democratic’ society while the public go about their daily business oblivious of the prison being built all around them by the hour.

Harvey Ruvin, a vice-chairman of ICLEI, was asked how Agenda 21 would affect liberties with regard to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, private property and freedom of speech. He replied: ‘Individual Rights must take a back-seat to the collective.’ The arrogance of these people is breathtaking. The extraordinary network supporting ICLEI and Agenda 21 includes the Rockefeller-sponsored America 2050; United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG); Metropolis; World Economic Forum; United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction; World Bank; Clinton Climate Initiative; Climate Group (Tony Blair); World Conservation Union (IUCN); Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership; Global Footprint Network; Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership; Global Footprint Network; International Centre for Sustainable Cities; Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative and the Stakeholder Forum. These and so many others are working to the same end – Agenda 21 and total human enslavement worldwide, although most of those involved will have no idea that they are building a global prison for themselves and their families.

End of quote.

I commend this article to you if you want to understand what is unfolding.

In essence, Maurice Strong’s key mission was completed at the UNCED conference, but he has continued on. Here is an insider video leading up to the Rio+20 conference in 2012, including words from Maurice Strong, made in April 2012.

For me, tracking Strong’s role through all of this is an illustration of how a potential player is identified by the elite, placed on a fast track and delivers for them.

And if you still consider that anthropogenic global warming is real, you may like to read this fictional romp by Michael Crichton called “State of Fear”. Crichton provides an engaging fictional framework within which he provides detailed actual data on global warming and how the scientific data does not support the heavily promoted lie.

Wake up, my friends, to the world in which you live ( via richardpresser.com ).

Spoilers ahead for those who aren’t caught up,​ but last season of Game of Thrones ended with a true Caesar ​outcome​ for all-around-hero (and potential Azor Ahai) Jon Snow. But unlike Caesar, today HBO teased the ​apparent​ resurrection of the character in the show's April Season 6 premiere. That plotline might be as far-fetched in reality as it may seem, but to find out, we spoke to one optimistic startup company called Humai, that is pursuing actual resurrection for human beings with a target of the next 30 years.

We’re using artificial intelligence and nanotechnology to store data of conversational styles, behavioral patterns, thought processes and information about how your body functions from the inside-out. This data will be coded into multiple sensor technologies, which will be built into an artificial body with the brain of a deceased human.

If it sounds like something out of science fiction, that's because it is.

The challenges are significant: taking a dead brain and bringing it back to life; wiring up the brain so that it can control a silicon-based machine; and trying to replicate that vital thing that is you--your personality, your past experiences, your mind. We wouldn't bet on this thing working, at least not anytime soon. But (hopefully) it won't hurt to try. To find out more about Humai’s quest for immortality, we sent a few questions to Josh Bocanegra, the CEO and founder of Humai.

Our biggest question: how?

Our mission is fairly simple to understand but obviously difficult to execute. We’ll first collect extensive data on our members for years prior to their death via various apps we’re developing. After death we’ll freeze the brain using cryonics technology. When the technology is fully developed we’ll implant the brain into an artificial body. The artificial body functions will be controlled with your thoughts by measuring brain waves. As the brain ages we’ll use nanotechnology to repair and improve cells. Cloning technology is going to help with this too.

Death seems binary. How do you know we're making progress?

Every step we take toward understanding how to get your thoughts to control an artificial body will be huge progress. I’m confident that in the process we’ll develop a technology that will even save lives. However, the ultimate test will be when we perform the first surgical procedure to implant a human brain to an artificial body.

Where does the biology and computer science meet?

The short answer is: Bionics, nanotechnology and artificial intelligence. I think the body has limitations and I don’t believe the body was evolved with the best possible functions. I think an artificial body will contribute more to the human experience. It will extend the human experience. So much so, that those who accept death will probably change their mind.

What does your staff look like?

There are 5 of us in total. We have one person working on A.I. We have 2 researchers. One who is focused on bionics and sensors. The other is focused on A.I. and nanotech. And finally, we have an ambassador who is forming a team of educators to help educate the public about Humais’ mission and the technology being used. I do a bit of everything but I’m mainly focused on strategy. We’re setting up meetings now and over the coming months to recruit team members.

Are you funded by any other organizations?

As of now, I’ve only put in my own money into this company. We’ll be looking for outside funding in the coming months.

What's your timeline for resurrection?

We believe we can resurrect the first human within 30 years.

Why fight death?

I don’t think of it as fighting death. I think of it as making death optional. I personally can’t imagine why anyone would want to die but I respect their wishes.

World War III: Why Russia will bury the West

If a global war breaks out, here are the key factors that could decide the outcome in Russia’s favour.

Russia’s primary deterrent weapon is the mighty SS-18. Source:mil.ru

In June 2014, the Pentagon conducted a “table top” exercise – a sort of war game between Russia and NATO. The scenario was Russian pressure on NATO member Estonia and Latvia. Would NATO be able to defend those countries?

“The results were dispiriting,” Julia Ioffe writes in Foreign Policy. Even if all US and NATO troops stationed in Europe were dispatched to the Baltics – including the 82nd Airborne, which is supposed to be ready to go on 24 hours’ notice – the US would lose.

“We just don’t have those forces in Europe,” explains a senior US general. “Then there’s the fact that the Russians have the world’s best surface-to-air missiles and are not afraid to use heavy artillery.”

The Russian ‘victory’ was not a one-off. The Americans conducted the exercise as many as 16 times, under various scenarios, all favourable to NATO, always with the same conclusion. The Russians were simply invincible.

In this backdrop, Turkey’s rash act of shooting down a Russian Air Force jet portends grave tidings for NATO. Because Turkey is a NATO member, if the Russian Air Force pounds the living daylight out of the Turks, at least in theory all the other members of the US-led military bloc are treaty-bound to come to its defence.

Although the chances that the Americans will risk New York for Istanbul are smaller than small – which leaves a very nervous Turkey on its own – one can never rule out the possibility of a NATO hothead wanting to attack Russia.

A nuclear exchange will undoubtedly have catastrophic consequences for both sides – and perhaps the entire planet – but there are certain factors that could skew the fighting field in Russia’s favour.Megaton capability

According to data exchanged on October 1, 2014 by Moscow and Washington, Russia has 1,643 deployed strategic warheads, compared with 1,642 for the US. Marginal difference in numbers but Russian land-based strategic forces have an explosive yield that is an order of magnitude greater than anything in the US armoury.

Moscow’s primary deterrent weapon is the mighty SS-18, a single one of which can destroy an area the size of New York – the state, not just the city. To get an idea of the destructive power of the SS-18, just look at the nuclear weapon the US used to destroy the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The Hiroshima bomb was a primitive 15 kiloton warhead and yet it wiped out a city of 70,000 in a few seconds. The SS-18 – code named Satan by NATO – carries 10 warheads, each having a yield of 750 to 1000 kiloton). Some of these missiles carry a single 20,000 kiloton warhead – that’s 1333 times Hiroshima.

At the same time, 80 per cent of the American population resides on the eastern and western seaboards, so a few well-aimed nuclear missiles can end all human life in these densely populated coastal strips. Russian has a population only half of the US but it’s dispersed widely across the country’s massive landmass so that pockets of human inhabitation can survive both a first as well as a second strike.

Russia has another trump card up its sleeve – its airborne supersonic bomber fleet of Tupolev Tu-160s. These Mach 2 plus aircraft can take off from well-defended airbases located deep in the heart of Russia, fly over the North Pole, launch nuclear-tipped cruise missiles from safe standoff distances over the Atlantic, and return home to watch the destruction on CNN.

That’s assuming CNN will be around. For, the Russian strategic bomber fleet can singlehandedly wipe out every major city in the US.

It is because the Americans know the capability of Russia’s nuclear forces that they have tried hard to eliminate the doomsday weapons like the SS-18 through arms limitation talks.Tactical warheads

Before the use of strategic weapons, Russia could cripple forward NATO bases with tactical – or battlefield – nukes. Russian military doctrine emphasises the use of small-yield nuclear weapons as a war fighting tool early on in a conflict in order to stun and confuse NATO forces, impacting their ability to think and act coherently.

After tactical nuclear artillery decimates forward deployed NATO military troops, Russia could deliver small-yield warheads via intermediate range missiles that could devastate the next line of military bases, while limiting civilian casualties. At this point the US would be faced with the option of retaliating with strategic weapons and face a devastating response from Moscow. A good guess is the option won’t be used.

For, no American president would risk a single US city for a dozen European ones. John F. Kennedy didn’t risk it in 1962 for the same reason – the loss of even one city was too many.State of US strategic forces

How reliable is the US Strategic Nuclear Command? If you are an American, you won’t feel so reassured after reading that Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton both “reportedly lost the launch code cards that presidents are expected to have on them at all times – Clinton for months, according to a former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. Carter allegedly sent his out with a suit to the cleaners”.

In any conflict – more so in a high stakes nuclear standoff – morale, training and discipline are key factors. Russian officers who have the job of deciding when and where to aim their nuclear missiles include PhD holders who are required to think on their feet. On the other hand, American personnel who have the same role are beset with alcoholism, depression and cheating.

Nothing can sugar coat the crisis plaguing the US strategic forces. In October 2013, Major General Michael Carey, responsible for the command of 450 nuclear missiles, was fired after drunken behaviour on a visit to Russia. Days earlier, another military officer, Vice Admiral Tim Giardina, with high-level responsibility for the country's nuclear arsenal, was relieved of his duties after he was caught using counterfeit gambling chips at an Iowa casino.

Think that’s frightening? Check this out. A US Air Force general who supported the command mission to provide nuclear forces for the US Strategic Command was an alcoholic. General David C. Uhrich kept a vodka bottle in his desk and repeatedly drank on duty, so much so that another officer told investigators that “if he did not have his alcohol, the wheels would come off”.

The rot has trickled down to US missileers who have a culture of cheating on competency tests, endangering the readiness off American ICBMs. Again, in February 2014, the US Navy revealed it was looking into allegations that enlisted sailors cheated on tests involving the nuclear reactors that power its submarines and aircraft carriers.

The US strategic forces are also suffering from systemic neglect, with its ICBM bases in North Dakota and Montana reporting “leaking roofs”. The missileers, who work in blast-proof bunkers located 60 feet underground, are forced to defecate in buckets and urinate in jugs, and bring it all back up at the end of 24 hours. How ready these personnel will be when they have to react to a Russian missile strike is questionable.

On the other hand, Russian Strategic Forces are treated as the very elites in the military. The quality of Russian personnel can be deduced from the actions of Russian strategic forces officer Lt Colonel Stanislav Petrov. On September 26, 1983, a Russian early-warning satellite indicated five US nuclear missile launches. Tensions were high between Washington and Moscow after the downing of a South Korean airliner weeks earlier, and Petrov had only minutes to respond. With little additional information to go on, he deemed the readings a false alarm, reasoning that “when people start a war, they don’t start it with only five missiles”.

This is precisely why highly qualified personnel matter. When you’re placed squarely in the cross hairs of the enemy’s nuclear missiles and you’re holed up in a bunker 60 feet below the earth’s surface, then nervousness, insomnia and depression are part of your daily life. Unable to cope, less educated personnel will abuse alcohol and drugs and even exhibit criminal behaviour. On the other hand, educated and motivated officers will keep their cool even in the event of a thermonuclear showdown.

For, a nuclear war may not necessarily involve a quick exchange of ballistic missiles. According to War Scare: Russia and America on the Nuclear Brink, by Peter Vincent Pry, Director of the US Nuclear Strategy Forum, the Russian Strategic Forces are trained to “launch pre-emptive or retaliatory nuclear strikes, survive a hammer blow from a massive enemy nuclear attack, launch follow-on nuclear strikes, and supervise military operations in a protracted nuclear war, expected to last weeks or months”.

Disinformation, camouflage and stratagem are some of the ways one can influence the outcome of a war. The Russians have taken these ancient arts to another level through the use of the theory of Reflexive Control (RC).

Developed by Russian military strategists in the 1960s, RC aims to convey information to an opponent that would influence them to voluntarily make a decision desired by the initiator of the action. It can be used against either human or computer-based decision-making processors. Russia employs it not only at the strategic and tactical levels in war but also in the geopolitical sphere.
Russian Army Major General M.D. Ionov was among the early proponents of RC, having pursued it since the 1970s. In an article in 1995, he noted that the objective of reflexive control is to force an enemy into making decisions that lead to his defeat by influencing or controlling his decision-making process.

Ionov considers this a form of high art founded of necessity on an intimate knowledge of human thinking and psychology, military history, the roots of the particular conflict, and the capabilities of competing combat assets.

Timothy L. Thomas writes in the Journal of Slavic Studies: “In a war in which reflexive control is being employed, the side with the highest degree of reflex (the side best able to imitate the other side’s thoughts or predict its behaviour) will have the best chances of winning. The degree of reflex depends on many factors, the most important of which are analytical capability, general erudition and experience, and the scope of knowledge about the enemy.”

If successfully achieved, reflexive control over the enemy makes it possible to influence their combat plans, their view of the situation, and how they fight. RC methods are varied and include camouflage (at all levels), disinformation, encouragement, blackmail by force, and the compromising of various officials and officers.

According to Robert C. Rasmussen of the Center for International Maritime Security, “It is exactly this type of application of Reflexive Control that a young Vladimir Putin would have learned in his early development at the 401st KGB School and in his career as a KGB/FSB officer.”

Because every battle is first fought in the head before a bullet is fired on the ground, Russia’s long experience with RC would be a key factor in its existential struggle with the US.

Thursday, November 26, 2015

Secret pagan basilica in Rome emerges from the shadows after 2,000 years

An underground chamber that was a place of worship for a mysterious cult 2,000 years ago has opened to the public for the first time.

Riccardo Mancinelli, technical director of the team in charge of restoring stucco figures on the walls of the pre-Christian, 1st century, underground basilica of Porta MaggiorePhoto: Chris Warde-Jones/The Telegraph

The basilica, the only one of its kind in the world, was excavated from solid tufa volcanic rock on the outskirts of the imperial capital in the first century AD.

Lavishly decorated with stucco reliefs of gods, goddesses, panthers, winged cherubs and pygmies, it was discovered by accident in 1917 during the construction of a railway line from Rome to Cassino, a town to the south. An underground passageway caved in, revealing the entrance to the hidden chamber.

Archway and stucco figures on the walls of the underground basilica Photo: Chris Warde-Jones/The Telegraph

A painstaking restoration that has been going on for years has now reached the point where the 40ft-long basilica can be opened to visitors.

The subterranean basilica, which predates Christianity, was built by a rich Roman family who were devotees of a little-known cult called Neopythagoreanism.

Originating in the first century BC, it was a school of mystical Hellenistic philosophy that preached asceticism and was based on the writings of Pythagoras and Plato.

“There were lots of cults worshipped at the time and the empire was in general fairly tolerant towards them," said Dr Giovanna Bandini, the director of the site. "But this one was seen as a threat because it discounted the idea of the emperor as a divine mediator between mortals and the gods.”

The basilica is thought to have been constructed by the influential Statilius family.

Stucco figures Photo: Chris Warde-Jones/The Telegraph

But they were accused of practising black magic and illicit rites by Agrippina, the ruthless, scheming mother of the Emperor Nero.

The head of the family, Titus Statilius Taurus, was investigated by the Senate for what Tacitus in his Annals called “addiction to magical superstitions”. He protested his innocence but committed suicide in AD53.

The basilica eventually fell into disrepair and was sealed up during the reign of the Emperor Claudius before being forgotten about.

A dedicated team of experts is restoring the interior of the basilica, scrubbing away mould and removing encrusted deposits of calcium with chemicals, tools and lasers.

Riccardo Mancinelli, technical director of the team in charge of restoring stucco figures on the walls of the basilica of Porta Maggiore Photo: Chris Warde-Jones/The Telegraph

Scaffolding platforms have been built in order to allow the restorers to access the arched ceiling, which is covered in stucco reliefs, some decayed but others in a remarkable state of preservation.

The restorers remove thick layers of calcium deposits first by hand, with scalpels, and then use small drills.

“They are the sort that you see in a dentist’s surgery,” said Riccardo Mancinelli, the technical director of the project.

The basilica consists of three naves lined by six rock pillars and an apse, all decorated with finely executed images of centaurs, griffins and satyrs.

There are depictions of classical heroes such as Achilles, Orpheus, Paris and Hercules.

Archway and stucco figures on the walls of the underground basilica Photo: Chris Warde-Jones/The Telegraph

The head of Medusa guards the entrance to the chamber, while the lower parts of the walls are painted a deep ox-blood red, with renditions of wild birds and women in togas.

The basilica, which is entirely hidden to the outside world and accessed via a door masked from the street by a mesh fence, lies directly beneath the railway line. Trains rumble noisily overhead.

Although the restoration is still under way, the basilica can now be visited by tourists. Groups will be kept small because of the fragility of the monument.

Daniela Duranti, one of the team in charge of restoring stucco figures on the walls of the pre-Christian, 1st century, underground basilica of Porta Maggiore Photo: Chris Warde-Jones/The Telegraph

“The temperature and humidity must be kept constant,” said Dr Bandini. “The temperature must not rise above 18C and humidity must not rise above 92 per cent. “But it mustn’t go below 87 per cent either, otherwise the stucco starts to dry out and crack.

“This place is unique in the Roman world in terms of its architecture and design. It was a precursor to the basilicas built during the Christian era, centuries later.”

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

In Episode 13 of A Minute to Midnite, Carolyn Hamlett a former Illuminist joins Chris and Tony as a guest, and reveals the Illuminati's shocking "Compassionate Plan" to kill all Christians! This will be done to free the world of the restraining influence that Christians impose on the collective spirituality of the human race. At least that's how the Luciferian Elite view the "Christian Problem" that hinders their ultimate solution! This is the true goal of the New World Order, and they will use the lie of reincarnation as part of the grand deception required to get humanity onboard with "The Plan".

In this fascinating, and sometimes shocking interview Carolyn tells listeners in no uncertain terms that the Illuminati is a Satanic organization who answers straight to Lucifer their master. She begins by explaining her birth into an Illuminist bloodline, delves a little into her upbringing, and then launches headlong into revealing the truth of the demonic plan that is being meticulously followed in the world today. The ultimate goal is the enslavement of humanity and eventual the destruction of the human race. The fallen angels are the masters of this conspiracy, and lead deceived humans into following a plan designed to lead to the demise of mankind.

We are not just in a physical war, but spiritual war, and we must put on our spiritual armor in order to be victorious.

This is the first in a series of interviews interview videos with Carolyn Hamlett that will be posted on the "A Minute To Midnite" youtube channel in the coming weeks. These interviews cover a wide range of subjects that relate to what is known in the Illuminist organization as "The Plan". It is advisable to subscribe to the youtube channel ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCC8ozSuY2gdYqT2ufdwlDdQ ) so as not to miss any of these upcoming blockbuster videos that will expose more of the evil plans of the Satanic Illuminists. This is vital so that you won't be deceived by what is coming "up on the earth" .

Note also, while this is primarily an audio podcast, it differs from previous episodes of A Minute To Midnite in that it contain a slide show and photographs throughout the clip that you may wish to view.

The £21 million “commercial” facility will edge the controversial science “closer to mainstream acceptance”, Chinese media said, following the development of a technique which began when Dolly the sheep became the first cloned mammal when she was born in Scotland in 1996.

The centre may cause alarm in Europe, where the cloning of animals for farming was banned in September due to animal welfare considerations.

But Xu Xiaochun, chairman of Chinese biotechnology company BoyaLife that is backing the facility, dismissed such concerns.

“Let me ask one question. Was this ban based on scientific rationale or ethical rationale or political agenda?” Mr Xu told The Telegraph.

“Legislation is always behind science. But in the area of cloning, I think we are going the wrong way and starting to kill the technology.”

The £21 million centre in being built in Tianjin Photo: Robert Wallwork / Alamy Stock Photo

Interest in agricultural biotechnology has been rapidly increasing in China, where farmers are struggling to provide enough beef for the country’s growing middle classes. Prices of the meat are said to have tripled from 2000 to 2013.

Mr Xu said his new facility will clone racehorses and a handful of dogs for people with “emotional ties” to their pets, but its main focus was producing cattle.

However, he appeared to be more excited about its ability to churn out sniffer dogs.

“The dog has to be smart and obedient, strong, sensitive," he said. "That's one in one hundred. You would normally have to look at a large number of dogs to find this one."

Dolly the sheep became the first cloned mammal when she was born in Scotland in 1996 Photo: Rex Features

The factory, which will include a 15,000 square metre laboratory, an animal centre, a gene bank and an exhibition hall, is currently being built in the port city of Tianjin, near Beijing, and is due to open in the first half of next year.

The two partners last year produced three pure-blood Tibetan mastiff puppies replicas, which was considered a major breakthrough for China, which has cloned sheep, cattle and pigs over the past 15 years.

The new facility will initially produce 100,000 cattle embryos a year, eventually increasing to one million.

The European Parliament’s environment committee co-rapporteur, Renate Sommer, has criticised the technique of cloning as not being “fully mature” as members voted on the ban in September.

“In fact, no further progress has been made with it,” Ms Sommer said at the time. “The mortality rate remains equally high. Many of the animals which are born alive die in the first few weeks, and they die painfully. Should we allow that?"

Saturday, November 21, 2015

Ledipasvir-Sofosbuvir (Harvoni)

Class and Mechanism: Ledipasvir is a potent inhibitor of HCV NS5A, a viral phosphoprotein that plays an important role in viral replication, assembly, and secretion. Sofosbuvir is a nucleotide analog inhibitor of hepatitis C virus NS5B polymerase—the key enzyme mediating HCV RNA replication. The triphosphate form of sofosbuvir (GS-461203) mimics the natural cellular uridine nucleotide and is incorporated by the HCV RNA polymerase into the elongating RNA primer strand, resulting in chain termination.

Manufacturer for United States: The fixed-dose combination of ledipasvir and sofosbuvir (Harvoni) (Figure 1) is manufactured by Gilead Sciences.

FDA Status: On October 10, 2014, the fixed-dose combination ledipasvir-sofosbuvir (Harvoni) was approved by the FDA for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 infection in adults. On November 12, 2015 the FDA expanded the approval of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir to include (a) treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotypes 4, 5, and 6 and (b) patients coinfected with HIV.

Indications: The fixed dose combination ledipasvir-sofosbuvir (90 mg/400 mg) is FDA-approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 in both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients. The treatment duration depends on prior treatment experience and the presence or absence of cirrhosis. Treatment experience is defined as patients who have failed treatment with either peginterferon plus ribavirin or peginterferon plus ribavirin plus a HCV protease inhibitor.

Genotype 1 treatment-naïve patients with or without cirrhosis: 12 weeks

Genotype 1 treatment-experienced patients without cirrhosis: 12 weeks

Genotype 1 treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis: 24 weeks

Treatment experience is defined as patients who have failed treatment with either peginterferon plus ribavirin or peginterferon plus ribavirin plus a HCV protease inhibitor.

Note: a treatment duration of 8 weeks can be considered in treatment-naive patients without cirrhosis who have a baseline HCV RNA level less than 6 million IU/mL.

Dosing: Ledipasvir-sofosbuvir (90 mg/400 mg) is a fixed-dose combination tablet (Figure 2). The recommended dosage is one tablet once daily, with or without food.

For patients with mild to moderate renal impairment, no dosage adjustment of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir is recommended. There are insufficient data regarding the safety and efficacy of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir in patients with severe renal impairment (eGFR less than 30 ml/min/1.73m2) or end-stage renal disease requiring dialysis. Thus, no dosage recommendation has been given for patients with severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease requiring dialysis.

For patients with mild, moderate, or severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh Class A, B, or C), no dosage adjustment is recommended, but the safety and efficacy of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in patients with decompensated cirrhosis has not been established.

Clinical Use: The combination of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir has primarily been studied as an all-oral (interferon-free) combination regimen in treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients with genotype 1 chronic HCV infection. Phase 3 studies (ION-1, ION-2, and ION-3) have consistently shown SVR12 rates greater than 90% with a 12-week course of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir in patients with genotype 1 chronic HCV. For treatment-experienced patients with cirrhosis, the SVR12 rates were significantly better with 24 weeks of therapy than with 12 weeks. A subanalysis of the ION-3 trial showed that treatment-naive patients without cirrhosis had excellent SVR12 rates with only 8 weeks of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir if their pre-treatment HCV RNA level was less than 6 million IU/mL. For the treatment of patients with genotype 1 infection, the addition of ribavirin to ledipasvir-sofosbuvir did not provide significant benefit. The approved clinical use for ledipasvir-sofosbuvir is only for genotype 1 chronic HCV-infected adults. Ledipasvir-sofosbuvir does not have a specific indication for HIV-infected persons.

Cost and Medication Access: The wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) for ledipasvir-sofosbuvir is $1125 per pill.

Cost of 8-week course of therapy = $63,000

Cost of 12-week course of therapy = $94,500

Cost of 24-week course of therapy = $189,000

Gilead Sciences has an active ledipasvir-sofosbuvir patient assistance program for eligible patients with hepatitis C who do not have insurance and do not have coverage through Medicaid or Medicare. Information regarding the Gilead Sciences ledipasvir-sofosbuvir (Harvoni) patient assistance program can be obtained at the Support Path for Solvaldiand Harvoni web site and by contacting them directly by phone at 1-855-769-7284 (hours of operation Monday through Friday between 9:00 am and 8:00 pm Eastern Time).

Adverse Effects: Available data from clinical trials has demonstrated the combination of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir has been very well tolerated. The most common reported adverse effects are fatigue and headache.

Major Drug Interactions: Ledipasvir-sofosbuvir has significant drug-drug interactions with P-gp inducers (e.g., St. John's wort and rifampin). The concomitant use of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir with P-gp inducers is not recommended. Additional drug-drug interactions may occur with ledipasvir-sofosbuvir and other medications and these are detailed in the Ledipasvir-sofosbuvir (Harvoni) Full

Resistance: In vitro, ledipasvir can select for the primary NS5A mutations Q30E and Y93H with genotype 1a and Y93H with genotype 1b; these mutations confer high-level reduced susceptibility to ledipasvir. In phase 3 trials, the most common mutations detected at failure for genotype 1a were Q30R, Y93H or N, and L31M; with genotype 1b, the most common mutation was Y93H. In vitro, the substitution S282T is associated with a 2- to 18-fold reduced susceptibility to sofosbuvir. The S282T mutation was not detected in any of the ledipasvir-sofosbuvir phase 3 trials. Ledipasvir has excellent in vitro activity against the NS5B S282T mutants. Similarly, sofosbuvir retains full activity against the NS5A ledipasvir-associated mutations.

Summary: The fixed dose combination of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir provides a very attractive and effective one pill once a day option for treatment of genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C infection. This regimen is the first FDA-approved interferon- and ribavirin-free regimen to treat hepatitis C. Three phase 3 trials (ION-1, ION-2, and ION-3) have demonstrated SVR rates consistently above 90%. The 24-week regimen for treatment-experienced cirrhotic patients is very expensive. Although ledipasvir-sofosbuvir is FDA approved only for genotype 1 HCV, it is also recommended therapy for patients with genotype 4, 5, or 6 in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, Infectious Diseases Society of America, (AASLD/IDSA) guidance. In addition, although ledipasvir-sofosbuvir is not specifically FDA-approved for HIV-infected patients, it will likely generate significant interest for use in this arena based on results from the ION-4 trial.